Well I received a Jury Service notice through the post today, but I’m not eligible to serve anyway. I’ve always wondered why people are so against the idea and go to extraordinary lengths to get out of it, personally I’ve always thought it would be kind of interesting.
Opinions? Has anyone here served and how did they find the experience?
Thanks!
Because you get $15-50 dollars for a day’s work (normally on the low end), and the job has no end in sight. IIRC in most cases you sit around for awhile and the person takes a plea bargain anyway.
I’ve called in twice and been excused, a month ago had to go in to be told that there were no cases that day.
I have been on a jury. The trial was over and done in one day and it was during a two-week stint where I was between jobs, so I didn’t lose any time or money.
I found it very interesting and enjoyed the experience.
Never served, never been summoned. There’s not a prosecutor in Iron County who wants me on his/her jury, anyway.
If I ever get summoned, the way I see it, odds are 50/50 that the defendant will be on trial for some ridiculous, victimless drug “crime” like possession or selling. If that’s the case, I’ll use my Constitutional right to base my vote not just on the facts of the defendant’s guilt or innocence, but also on my conscience regarding the law itself. Since I believe our drug laws are immoral, I’ll vote “not guilty” even if he/she is guilty as hell.
Jury Nullification FTW!
Point of order; you do not have a “Constitutional right” to nullify.
You have the de facto ability to do so as a consequence of how the jury system works and the double jeopardy clause (one which can lead to a mistrial at that), but that doesn’t mean you have a right to or that you should, because we already have a process in place for the people to change laws they don’t like.
Actually, every time I’ve been on a jury, it’s either been for a serious crime like murder or robbery, or it’s been a civil case like a lawsuit.
I don’t think simple drug crimes make it to jury trials very often.
In practice that process is corrupt and not available to the ordinary citizen. There was “already a process in place” to protest the high taxes on tea in 1773 as well.
Current drug laws, especially the ones regarding drugs less harmful than alcohol, are indefensible. They are not supported by any amount of objective research or facts, either now or when the laws were written. They are essentially asspulls made during certain mass “crime panics” when it became a fad to be “tough on crime” to secure votes.
Drug laws should be determined by calm evaluations of the facts, supported by data with the decisions made by educated people. Current laws have no more legitimacy than laws banning witchcraft.
I always found the jury experience fine, although boring at times – there’s a lot of waiting involved.
The biggest problem is that you can’t be sure when it will be over. That means you don’t know when you’ll be able to return to your normal work actitvities, go on trip, etc.
This has surprisingly little to do with jury trials. Very, very few jury trials have to do with drug cases. In fact, most of them aren’t even criminal cases. I think most jury trials nowadays are civil cases.
Mmmm Mmmm Mmmm! That coffee was Amazing!
I have been on jury duty about 3 times. Each was very short, 1-2 days for trial and deliberation. There was no danger of being selected on long trials, they would ask if your employer supported you for a long trial - mine didn’t. (Consequently, juries for long trials are sometimes made up of exclusively: retirees, non-working housewives, employees from the few major corporations that support their employees being on long trials (the phone company?), which results in a lack of diversity IMHO, it’s a problem.)
Anywho, I really enjoyed the process and learned a lot (it’s nothing like on TV). I couldn’t help but observe some weaknesses in the system - in our state the Judges instructions are to “consider only testimony and evidence - do not consider anything said by either side of counsel”. SO, if that is the case why do you make me listen to each of them drone on at the beginning and end of the trial? I should be able to pop in my earbuds at those times, right? Yeah, not so much…
And, in spite of the judges instructions, people is people. In the jury deliberation I found some people were just absolutely unable to move off of their preconceived notions and decide based on the evidence in this case. “My dad was arrested once and he didn’t do anything! So, I’m gonna vote not guilty.”
The other aspect that struck me was how wasteful the whole process is sometimes. Some trials are about such incredibly petty stuff, and here is a room full of people sitting here deciding this. Oh, well.
But, that in itself was educational!
To answer the OP and not the hijack, I have always felt it is everyone’s duty to serve when called. The system is weakened when only those dumb enough to not be able to get out of it serve.
To be honest though I would hate to be on a trial. I have been through many of them and in general they are terribly boring. I have not be called in years and the times I have, I have not been put on a trial.
Do you also believe you have a constitutional right to lie about this plan if asked during voir dire?
I’d think I would enjoy the experience provided it wasn’t for a sequestered 4 month murder trial. The one time I was called it was a manslaughter case where a guy and his date were involved in an accident going home from a bar and she was killed. I’d gladly have served and was fascinated as the judge went over with us what was involved and what was expected of us… until the stomach bug I had at the time caused me to have to exit the jury area as she was still speaking to us.
Judge: Where do you think you’re going?
Me: I’m very sorry, Judge, but I’ve got a bug and I think I’m going to be sick.
Judge: Well you’ll just have to wait unti I finis…
Me: Sorry! bolts toward the bathroom
Barfs into courthouse toilet
Baliff: Mr. lieu?
Me: I’m sorry, I’ll be right… Baarfff!
Baliff: The judge says you can go.
Me: Baaarrfff… Okay.
Maybe next time.
I was on a jury once for a civil trial. Jury selection took a day and the trial itself took another day and a half. I found it fairly interesting, but wouldn’t want to do it for more than a week or so at a time.
you get coffee while waiting.
I’d love to serve. I think it would be fascinating, but…
I have a post-graduate degree in mathematics, I am a former employee of a US intelligence agency (where they Never Say Anything), I’m politically conservative, and I’m married to a cop.
No defense attorney is going to let me within ten miles of his jury.
Federal employees can go on jury duty and not lose any pay for the day(s), jury duty falls under administrative leave.
I’ve received a notice and was tapped for a juror pool on my last day of eligibility. Between orientation and jury selection, we were told that the trial had got a continuance and we could go home.
That’s a valid opinion, but not one relevant to the role of a jury. The purpose of a jury is to decide whether the individual is guilty of the charges against them, not to rewrite the law of the land. If there were laws against witchcraft today and people were being put on trial for them, it would be the duty of a jury to convict if that was what the facts demanded.
Every time I’ve been called they either don’t need me when I call in the night before, or I get bounced right off the bat for being a debate coach. I’d like to do my civic duty but they won’t let me.
Maybe after I retire.